Angus King

I think this qualifies as an emergency, and I hope that we can act promptly.

There is no single solution to this problem.

I characterize what we are looking at now as the longest windup for a punch in world history.

We are 100 percent dependent on 21 minerals from other countries, which is a dangerous place to be, particularly when they have strategic value.

I think we need to find ways to have a predictable and timely permitting process that still adequately protects the environment.

It's been very illuminating, and we look forward to working with you.

But you feel at this point the contract and the development is on track?

I think it's one of the most important that we have, that the Air Force and the government is undertaking.

I hope that you'll keep in touch with the committee on that project as it moves forward.

I commend--again, we've got to think very creatively about how we fill this shortfall.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I hesitate to speculate how a jet airplane would fly if Congress was in the driver's seat, the pilot's seat.

So part of the problem with a continuing resolution is predictability and maintaining your acquisitions and maintaining the industrial base.

Isn't that what OCO [overseas contingency operations] was all about?

So basically what you're saying is if you don't have additional funding over and above what you had for last year, you'd run out of money and that's why you'd have to ground those squadrons.

I agree with you that it's no way to govern, and we shouldn't be even thinking about a further continuing resolution for the rest of the year.

Resources are never unlimited, and the Air Force must make investments based on near-term risks as well as future threats.

Too many defensive acquisition programs over-promise and under-deliver on cost and schedule.

I want to emphasize on a timely basis--while protecting our taxpayers' dollars.

I want to emphasize dominate--near-peer adversaries across the full spectrum of military operations.

Another opportunity--and I hate to raise the word 'joint' because it does not have a very good history in military procurement.

But I would also add to that list of items the process itself as it relates to their ability to interact with the Pentagon.

I just commend that to you. I would suggest a summit meeting in San Jose about what are the issues and how do we improve this program.

What about that as an option?

Practicality and buildability is part of the requirements process.